Last April I wrote a post and did some research on this topic, after hearing about a March 2012 conference in Arizona ? a very interesting state from the family law perspective for several reasons (among them a major AFCC chapter, the origination of the Fathers and Families Coalition of America began there, a certain Republican legislator (Mark Anderson) was also a Unification Church (i.e. the late Rev. Sun Myung Moon) member, and a certain marriage-promotion organization with ties to the Godzich family, called ?National Association of Marriage Enhancement,? the Godziches also have some connections to G.W. Bush, and a number of issues relative to this blog, and interesting in their own right.
I also learned while doing this post that Phoenix is moreover home to the Milton H. Erickson Foundation, Inc., with its emphasis on Hypnosis and Psychotherapy. A 2002 Newsletter from this foundation, highlights attendees of a ?2001 Congress on Eriksonian Hypnosis and Psychotherapy states that for the past 20 years the foundation had petitioned the City of Phoenix to put up a commemorative bench, which brings us to the point both psychotherapy and psychology tend to have cult leaders and followers, in short, many characteristics of Religions.
I though this could be a shorter post, as I?d already written the preliminary material last April, simply warning people (as ever) about certain so-called family court reform advocacy groups who have unique, to say the least, collaborations among the field of psychologists and psychiatrists, who are directly profiting from the increase and expansion of family court chaos to start with. There are definite appearances of some slave/master (controller/handler) relationships among certain groups, and I consider it VERY serious issue, given that the target clientele are already women, typically, who have undergone some serious terror and/or trauma in their lives already, and have been subjected to intimidation techniques through the courts.
However as I had to mention, and posted for reference, the truths that a lot of this field developed as part of psychological warfare (i.e., mind control) surrounding engaging the United States in two World Wars, (etc.), I am questioning whether these traumatized and re-traumatized women (mothers) in particular ? are themselves being controlled, in the worst sense, through those who have the tools, the desire, the incentive, and the ability to do so, and have master the art of double-speak, sound-byte, and illogic in the process.
So Consider this post something like where ?Our Broken Family Courts? meets ?Battered mothers Custody Conference? meets ?The Anglo-American Alliance and Eugenics, revisited.? That latter part, it meets through the field of psychology, psychiatry, psychopharmacology (and desire of psychologists to have an unending source of income, preferably from the federal funding of healthcare), and the ability to use the word ?Forensic? in association with ?Psychologist.? Fasten your seat belts, it is not an easy ride ? but it is a major, and legitimate part of the history of this country.
What are groups trying to help Battered Mothers who lost custody of their kids to Abusers, conferencing with Trauma Survivors (that trauma, among others) and people whose normal field of practice includes hypnosis? Take for example, the commonplace acceptance of hypnosis as part of therapy?
Hypnosis can be authoritarian, or induced unwittingly by the therapist, and as such, it is part of coercive control. The subject is then susceptible to suggestions given by the therapist. Ostensibly these should be ethical ? to help people overcome shell-shock (original)y), addictions, such as smoking, etc. However as a powerful tool, when the will and consent are over-ridden, then we are in the realm of coercion adn OUT of the realm of free will. Talk about a powerful tool!
| Milton H. Erikson from ?Brief History of Hypnosis?: [[Milton Erickson was paralyzed by polio when young, and later in his 1950s. He has many sisters and one brother; a life worth reading about, as his practice is now engrained into many psychotherapists across the land; there are international societies. Moreover, they tend to go into couples and family therapy...]]
|
Some of the key individuals (mentioned in this posat) are active in the ?fix Our Broken Courts? initiative ? and within the Ericksonian Hypnosis movement. I also noticed another AFCC type person (Constance Ahrons) advertising in a newsletter.
Now would not be the season to go into an unintentional trancelike state at repeated suggestions by certain people that our courts are actually broken and that it takes more ? but better aligned ? psychotherapy to handle that matter.
This post is very informative, has background information on individuals, nonprofit associations mentioned in the conference, the formation of schools of professional psychology (which Cummings had a significant influence in developing overall). It should also be kept in mind that our country participated in World War I and World War II (not to mention others), which provided plenty of subject matter, as well as a political need to test recruits coming in, help vets coming out, and in general an ability to persuade the public that we should support these wars. It was around this time that both psychology and the professionalization of the fields of education (i.e., the realm of educational psychology) developed. I learned in looking at this (overall) that Cummings, who at one point was head of mental health for Kaiser, had also brought over Michael Balint and his wife (sorry, DNR), from England ? and from Tavistock. (search results here, several of the posts are mine, for example, see ?From Tavistock to TMAP;? That blog appears to be an automatic search-generated one on child abuse reform; its posts are just links).
Overall, this information is part of the history of the United States and relevant to its educational systems and court systems, health care systems (can you spell Medicaid?). While disturbing, the benefit is that more things will make sense. However, things do not make sense if one refuses to think about them, hear them, and process for possible, logical, or illogical (rational or irrational). And these matters come smack up against the issue of good vs. evil, moral vs. immoral (and what those standards are), and whether people we have sought help from are in fact are (or, are not ? you decide!) using that need for personal, profit, or even possibly worse, purposes ? few of which have to do with the labeling. If one only looks at the labels then you are part of the problem in this country ? as more than likely your money and your silence, and your need to retain a certain social status (or stability) is continuing to enable this.
So, I wrote this up last April, 2012, under this title:. Time to revisit this information.
(Please scan for general contents. ? it?s not that hard reading, and gives detailed and overview information that sheds light on ?where we?re at? today, when people victimized by the family court systems, in part because these systems have psychologized real danger, criminal activity and other life-altering situations, labeling them as a problem existing in the mind of the people (including children) reporting, and promoted a national rhetoric deflecting the focus off the crimes (or fact-finding to determine whether they occurred) and instead focusing on counseling how victims must get along with the perps, or others who have directly harmed their family members. I.e., assembling conferences of people who are trauma survivors ? and then recommending that some of the leaders in promoting the professional field of psychology itself should be the new leaders of a reform movement, simply does not make sense. At least in my opinion.]
In this particular case, there is a direct connection between the people (organizations) sponsoring said conference and the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations. This link talks about occult religions, Illuminati (and all that) but what I want us to see is the similar attitude ? the leaders are going to create a better world (i.e., Utopia) ? or so they say ? when in actuality, it?s about centralized control, and enslavement. The degree of experimentation which has been done on how to create ?dissociated? personalities through ongoing, and early childhood, trauma is relevant, and should not be ignored. That process creates a slave/master relationship, meaning slaves can be programmed to obey, possibly may be susceptible to hypnosis (triggers), and other mean, nasty things not in the public?s best interest. If speech about ?Illumimati? is not an automatic turnoff (I hope it?s not, here), continue reading, and let?s get honest about some of these influences, regardless of how one interprets them.
Note: Some of this next source (just found in looking up Tavistock, again) page is disturbing material; it deals with intentional (and military/religious etc.) use of trauma to provoke programmable, dissociated MPD. However I find it relevant because many people seeking to reform the ?Crises in the Courts? (including me!) have been repeatedly exposed to un-real trauma that most of society doesn?t want to admit exists, or at least in the forms it actually does exist. Later on it mentions, for example, Paul Bonacci (Franklin Coverup case) and how children were terrorized into submissions, then used as drug mules, or to help blackmail those in power for political purposes.
However it?s relevant in that ? I have got to point this out ? that organizations seeking a following in how to reform the courts are often authoritarian in leadership, monotonously repetitive in their theories, and prone to sound-bytes. They also show up at conferences of traumatized mothers, sometimes second-generation survivors of this. A major organization providing followers to some of the more authoritarian types is, from what I?ve heard, led by a survivor of ritual abuse herself as a young girl. In such situations, the ability to think independently, and stand up to authority (without coming under someone else?s authority) can be ? and in this case, has been, I say ? compromised.
Before bringing up a (disturbing) post on this, here?s a chatty interview of Dr. Cummings, which relates how he became involved as head psychologist of Kaiser Permanente (major health system) in the 1950s, shortly after they?d fired the previous Chief, you may recall the name Timothy O?Leary, who went on to popularize LSD. Also interesting is that somehow even by this time, it appears Dr. Cummings was on a first-name basis with the founder of Kaiser Permanent (Sidney Garfield), who then eventually called him up and said, take this position.
Recommended reading. When Dr. Cummings then mentions Michael Balint, it is as having founded the British Mental health system after World War II? and in the context (first paragraphs here) of realizing that if one was going to hang around with the psychoanalysts of the well-to-do, that limits scope of practice ? how were more people going to be reached with the good news that mental health help was available to them also? The first category he mentions is ?African Americans.? . . . It?s an interesting, and not that long, interview:
If I were you, I?d read it (entertaining enough reading as well), for example to see how Michael Balint and his wife were brought over, how they became consultants in D.C., and how the plan of intermittent psychological treatment over a lifetime was hatched?using his connections at all times to get an ear with Ted Kennedy (when he was head of Senate subcommittee on healthcare ? or setting up the California School of Professional Psychology by playing up Ronald Reagan (then Governor) who at teh time had a beef with the Board of Regents (of the University of California system), (remember the 1960s, student unrest, etc? Maybe Timothy O?Leary played a part as well,?.). According to this account, Cummings, though a connection, got an interview with the governor and presented himself as a solution to an (unrelated) problem, and got in exchange, accreditation for the school he wanted ? at first simply allowing students to access the terrific UC library system using Cummings card, available to him as a Ph.D. (note: call that cheating??).. You can also see that this individual is (clearly!) a serial entrepreneur (probably a kind of genius at some level) who bores once a problem is solved, and goes out to solve another one.
(too bad a lot of future generations of potential serial entrepreneurs are themselves being traumatized and run through this system!). Also see, the clear narration that along with creating a school, one has to create the boards to certify its professionally. I think we should look at this part. They are simply nonprofit trade associations which agree on what are the standards of any profession, including professions they halped create:
| <Segments of this lighthearted, but revealing (to the non-initiated) 2008 Nick Cummings Interview, around a San Diego ?Brief Therapy Conference on Psychotherapy Table of Contents, being:
|
@@@@
Again, history is a continuity of forces, and we have to face that psychology and "psychological warfare" are not necessarily separate. The history of the development of psychology, as much as it was influenced by either this one creative powerhouse (with encouragement and collaboration from a colleague? from London who helped found the mental health system of Great Britan after WWII, i.e., the Balints); there is absolutely a dark side to it also. Many of us already know this as parents being subjected to extreme cruelty, or forced our kids to be subjected to the same, and being lectured or moralized to as if we were some inferior part of the human race when we protest being forced to co-parent with people who have threaten to kill us, or have harmed our kids, and have previously injured etc. -- in the name of some theoretical social science construct that marriage and fatherhood are better for the country, no matter what. ....
The other thing I am facing is that the resulting hordes of traumatized and virtually nomadic parents (resulting from the courts) can be, and I'll have to say, are being, "controlled" by certain authoritarian groups setting up their own personal oligarchies within the same government, and following many of its practices. Primary to this is framing the issues, rejecting non-compliant feedback (i.e., the
primary goal is not pursuit of the truth) and demanding national (or statewide) solutions to the problem, expressed as they have framed it.
I am starting to no longer recognize this country, which for a few decades (like maybe four of them), I personally had no serious issues with. But now I do.
There are some "scholarly references" to this book which came up on a search of this topic. See introductory pages, "American Caligula" of the "Unauthorized Biography of George Bush (not GWBush)," just prior to USA elections of 1992. It begins by talking about the initiation of the Iraq war, mentions the family line (i.e., back to royalty), and connections to what was at the time the largest bank in the world, not to mention "psychotic episodes." The first few paragraphs state the purpose of the book, mostly that if Americans allow GWBush a second term, they deserve what they get. p. 10 talks about the concept of oligarchy goes with obsession with race science, breeding, and essentially eugenics. See Chapters III ("Race Hygiene: Three Bush Family Alliances"/one has to look at the Nazi connection, "special courts were established for the sterilization of the German mentally, ill, blind, the deaf, and alcoholics," training a generation of physicians AND psychiatrists in this practice) and VII (Skull and Bones, @ Yale). This is a full-length, on-line book by Tarply and Chaitkin. It also forces the readers to face where some of the profits funding our major institutions came from (i.e., opium, etc.). It is good (healthy) to be forced to understand who financed what, and a track record on some of the tools, including institutes, by which the inferior were sterilized, and/or euthanized...
Keeping in mind that the same set of royalties were expert breeders of race horses, dogs, etc. How far-fetched is it that a similar attitude would not apply to people? However, for example, 1969 Republican Task Force on Earth Resources and Population (Chairman George H.Bush) invites eugenicist William Shockley (also helped make possible the computer//information age we are in), and Arthur Jensen: Congressional Testimony
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/719579/posts?page=63
|
*****
This is an October 2012 Press Release (Contact Kathleen Russell) at the top, featuring primarily this foundation, of course the sound byte about ?our broken family courts? and because it?s such a crisis, the foundation, here, has analyzed the problems, written up a report and (apparently they have the dough to do this) mailed a copy to every member of Congress, Every State?s Governor and Chief Justice, and thousands of law schools and forensic psychologists across the countries..
Just so we understand we are dealing with the true insightful experts here, who want a federal level solution (based on their analyses) and are going about getting it with this mailing. Which it says is not really available to the general public, except a few leftover copies in a Reno, NV office.
The report highlights their (The Cummings Foundation?s) analyses (plural?) of the U.S. Family Court?s systemic flaws as presented by esteemed lawyers, judges, psychologists, and other experts who participated at the Cummings Foundation?s ?Our Broken Family Courts? Conference in Phoenix, Arizona last March.
Please finish reading the short, two-pager press release above to see it?s also helping promote the Holly Collins story, and again references the ?58,000 children a year? figure from The Leadership Council. The Cummings Foundation?s initiative wants to ?develop policy solutions at the federal level which will address the crisis in a meaningful way.?
The Cummings Foundation is significant from the psychologists (and funding) point of view, as well as who the ?Broken Family Courts? conference involved (i.e., people promoting the field of psychology and its professionalization, at least one representative (attorney) who also presents, or has, at the Battered Mothers Custody Conference in New York, and in doing lookups, I noticed at least one related individual whose work product was PETP (Parent Education Training Plan, a program one can obtain certification in )using the word ?high=conflict? several times. [[G. Andrew H. Benjamin, PhD, ABPP, who also out of Seattle runs a workshop on "How to Build a Successful Psychology Practice at the Intersection of Behavioral Health and Law."]]
How ?nice? (and ?modest?) of them to solicit input from parents not on the coattails of certain organizations who may have something to say, such as we already know that these courts are pushing therapeutic jurisprudence, parental alienation, parent coordination, fatherhood, equal parenting laws, marriage (using welfare funds), and providing a wonderful professional future (including retirement income and royalties) for the psychologists (forensic or not) working in the family court arena, and are ? like the Nicholas Cummings, his foundation, and friends, have worked hard, and diligently, to make sure continues to happen with federal funding.
Sure, I think as there?s a ?fiscal cliff? imminent, that what this world needs now is MORE forensic psychologists who have Rx privileges ? so that people who are traumatized by the ongoing violent crimes that happen around the courts (routinely) and which are their bread and butter, in many ways ? will at least get treated for it. And the word ?treatment? was indeed used in conjunction with ?Domestic Violence? by one of the conferences from Arizona?s Broken Courts Conference.
One of the more interesting aspects of Nicholas Cummings, not that he isn?t brilliant and a creative thinker (that?s quickly obvious), hard worker, with a good business sense on behalf of his own profession ? which should at all times be remembered, that the primary motivator driving his life?s work appears to be ensuring major funding and ongoing opportunities for his profession, and that is primarily, psychologists. As such, the family courts are ideal, as their whole ?schema? is to order counseling through the public funds at public AND private expense, for parents who cannot agree apart from the courts on custody matters.
I think it?s time the rest of us (and I?m saying this in part for a large network of noncustodial mothers I?m aware of who are, generally speaking, in serious distress, poverty, trauma, and/or near-homelessness, some of who are having their disability checks garnished to pay child support to an ex after they supported a child, or reported a very young child who was evidencing sexual abuse or even reporting it, among other problems (i.e., there were other forms of violence towards the mother in the home). I cannot possibly get through to those who simply don?t want to look at nonprofit status and agenda, or the grants system to understand what our own government is doing in these matters.
But I feel I can at least show enough documentation of the purpose of at least this ONE Cummings Foundation, and it?s connection to pushing the profession to the doctoral level, resulting in one of the highest paid (per hour) professions around, other than actually being a judge ? and this same group was pushing hard to get their pay from primary care.
Oh yes, and I should probably mention that some of their predecessors were into things like eugenics, i.e., they believed certain ethnicities were inferior, and should therefore not be educated more than necessary for their expected lots in life, i.e, workers. But on the way to getting these (profiled less-competent races), they might as well, along with others, i.e., children ? become the subject of studies of the adaptive capacity of humans (i.e., experimentation).
I also should point out that some of the same colleagues are very, very much into helping the psychologists to gt ?prescriptive abilities,? i.e., THEY want to be able to fill out some Rx for mental health problems (I wonder if this includes Munchhausens? by Proxy for mothers?.). This includes imagining that they remembered incest (false memories), and so forth.
Professional Issues in Pharmacotherapy
Last April, this was a wonderful lessons (reading, education) for me in the history of the APA, some of its sects, founders, and ideology ? as well as how it was expanded and promoted. Now is a GREAT time to get up to speed on this, one way or another ? and ask, has the attitude of the professionals REALLy changed that much, from using human subject matter to measure (if not head size, mental states), test, label, prescribe (antipsychotics) and get reimbursed royally for the same.
Reviewing, when I noticed this back in 2012 spring:
I notice things. So, when I noticed the author of Battered Women?s Syndrome, AND a presenter or so from the Battered Mother?s Custody Conference ? being featured in an Arizona Conference last year (2012) called ?Our Broken Family Courts? I did what a psychologist or M.D. might consider a brief workup, or history of the situation. I actually stumbled across the conference on-line just looking up a certain professional whose responses at BMCC simply didn?t make sense.
I think it?s time to again reference a post I wrote last Spring, after it came to my attention.
So, I wrote this up last April, 2012, under this title:
Why Watching Conference Agenda is Crucial: Cummings Foundation, Behavioral Health Promotion, and ?Our? ?Broken? Family Court System.
| ?Our Broken Family Court? isn?t. It ain?t ?Ours? and it ain?t ?Broken.? That phrase is a ?tell.? I?ll tell you?why?. As someone who?s ?heard it all? about the court reform movements from professionals talking about the Crisis in the Courts . . . . I?m getting real tired of that analysis. From (note main URL domain name): Why are psychologists so obsessed (and it IS an obsession) with using the word "forensic" to describe themselves? ?Where does that term come from? (Put that question on the back burner for a bit -- I'll be back to it). Why would certain groups be providing FREE training in Arizona in this field? Our broken family court system: Free training in Arizona Another free training geared toward child custody evaluators is coming up March 16-17 in Phoenix, Arizona. Co-sponsored by the?National Alliance of Professional Psychology Providers and the?Nicholas and Dorothy Cummings Foundation, it features a cast of well-known experts, including: More information and online registration is available?HERE. BEFORE looking into this "who's who," here's the prologue: They aren't broken, they are proceeding exactly according to design and that design can be basically understood if one reviews the history, strategies, and particularly the membership of the organization "Association of Family and Conciliation Courts." It is not the only association in the neighborhood influencing this court system, but it appears to be one of the earliest, and most widely connected. |
(more active links at the post itself).
I ask people involved, or snared, in this family law situation particularly people who are protesting abuse of minor children which is being rejected as "in your mind" or a co-parenting, alienation (etc.) problem, to read through that post from April 2012. it's very detailed and brings us up to the current, including what is the agenda of these conferences, certain associations, and what is the influence (clout, etc.) of some of the people involved.
Really take a look at the history of the development of psychology in this country, particularly from the late 1800s forward -- WHO was pushing and promoting this field, in cluding some of the earliest leaders of the APA (American Psychological Association). What were their goals, purpose, and intentions in developing this new field?
As always, it takes both wealth, diligence, and usually a nonprofit trade association (add a publication, conferences, etc.) to literally create professions that are going to end up being mainstreamed in to federally-supported programs such as Medicaid -- or mandated by places such as custody evaluators assigned to handle parenting during divorce. Those things didn't just happen over night; they had to be pushed, promoted, strategized, envisioned, and sold.
For example, the name Jack Wiggins came up in association. His primary field of experience os Psychopharmacology. In the era early 2000s, (2003, I believe), then-President George W. Bush formed a New Freedom Commission on Mental Health which it seems that Dr. Cummings, above, had some involvement or connection to. FYI, the field of Mental Health becoming a NATIONAL PRE-OCCUPATION should be watched carefully,particularly when people get drugged or institutionalized after labeling -- is it an Archipelago setup? Particularly when, as I will CONTINUE to remind us, pharmaceutical corporations are about the largest ones on the planet; they are promoting legislation at the federal level and highly influential on nonprofits such as "ALEC" (American Legislative Executive Council" or whatever it's called) which basically draft bills, and their legislator members get to bring back to their state legislatures. I am also reminded of the whistleblower scandals of valiant souls like ALlen Jones (PENNMap and TMAP), in which a basic algorithm apparently decided who got drugged. I blogged this RECENTLY (atypical antipsychotics and kickbacks).
Therefore when an organization such as Center for Judicial Excellence (or at least Ms. Russell) who has championed the cause of parents losing custody to batterers and molesters, and I'm deducing doesn't think "parental alienation" theory is the greatest thing since sliced bread -- teams up with the CUmmings Foundation --and mutually back pats, we need to take a closer look. Fast.
Check this out, and see the footnote credits of the four authors involved *date 2004*
Professional Issues in Pharmacology for Psychologists
In this blog I simple looked up many of the people putting on the conference, and involved in the sponsoring nonprofit, i.e., "National Association of Professional Psychology Providers" (NAPPP), an organization listed as from "D.C." but having a registration in California also (and possibly other states, I didn't check....).
G. Stanley Hall was the APA's first President. This leads into why you tend to find educators and psychologists in such close proximity. For example, G. Stanley Hall, it sounds, was instrumental in de-emphasizing academics in high school, and viewing it rather instead as an extension of elementary school (sound like about where it's at today, overall?)... and based on ideas of Darwin and others, helped develop the field of educational psychology. He influenced another man Lewis Terman (Development of the IQ test) who was also a eugenicist, and it would seem from the evidence, racist. The tests then would help determine who got what kind of education, i.e., the laborer track or the leadership track. Just a sample here:
| From 1880-1920, the high school was primarily college preparatory, emphasizing Latin, modern foreign languages, mathematics, science, English and history.?However, Hall objected strongly to the college preparatory view, arguing that high school should be more concerned with the education of adolescents.?. The high school was the institutional extension of the elementary school. Hall and other educators began to view the high school as a school for adolescents rather than a strictly college preparatory institution. {{who here knows that the word "adolescent" hasn't been around that long?}} In 1887, he founded the American Journal of Psychology. In 1889, he was named president of the newly founded Clark University in Worcester, Massachusetts. Under his guidance considerable work was done in educational research at the university during its first 20 years. Hall was instrumental in the development of the new science of educational psychology. Hall's pioneering studies, Adolescence (1904) and Educational Problems (1911), described?the implications of adolescent development on education. In the late 19th Century, Hall was influenced by Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. It provided an impetus for the scientific examination of child development. His emphasis on the survival behavior of different species stimulated an interest in observing children to identify their adaptive behaviors and to learn about the inheritance of human behavior. |
And you wonder how our schools were turned from teaching to testing and measuring how children adapt to survival situation -- now, this apparently includes survival situations involving lockdown and classroom shootings....
| One major stimulus was the?introduction in 1916 by the American psychologist Lewis Terman of the test known today as the Standford-Binet Intelligence Test. This test led to a number of studies about children's intellectual development. Dozens of leading universities began observational studies of children and their families, where the same children were observed and tested over a specific time period.? This testing led many other psychologists to further their views and create other tests involving the measurement of a child's head, mental abilities, intellectual strengths and weaknesses and many others. Educators today use these tests, which include the General Aptitude Test Battery, Inkblot Test, and Thematic Apperception Test, in elementary, middle, and high schools. Having such a large number of soldiers to test and screen for war (World War I), got the gears thinking -- hey, can't we apply these same sorting tricks to schools as well? Yeah, let's develop that also: (Again, better viewed at the original blogpost -- more active links): He also administered English tests to Spanish-speakers and unschooled African-Americans, concluding: ?High-grade or border-line deficiency? is very, very common among Spanish-Indian and Mexican families of the Southwest and also among negroes. Their dullness seems to be racial, or at least inherent in the family stocks from which they come? Children of this group should be segregated into separate classes? They cannot master?abstractions but they can often be made into efficient workers? from a eugenic point of view they constitute a grave problem because of their unusually prolific breeding? (The Measurement of Intelligence, 1916, p. 91-92). Unlike Binet and Simon, whose goal was to identify less able school children in order to aid them with the needed care required,?Terman proposed using IQ tests to classify children and put them on the appropriate job-track. He believed IQ was inherited and was the strongest predictor of one's ultimate success in life. Terman adopted?William Stern's suggestion that mental age/chronological age times 100 (to get rid of the decimal) be made the?intelligence quotient?or?IQ. (NB: Most modern IQ tests calculate the intelligence quotient differently.) In 1921, Terman initiated the?Genetic Studies of Genius, a long-term study of?gifted children. He found that gifted children did not fit the existing stereotypes often associated with them: they were not weak and sickly social misfits, but in fact were generally taller, in better health, better developed physically, and better adapted socially than other children. The children included in his studies were colloquially referred to as "Termites".[2] Terman later joined the Human Betterment Foundation,?a?Pasadena-based eugenics group founded by?E.S. Gosney?in 1928 which had as part of its agenda the promotion and enforcement of compulsory sterilization?laws in?California.?Terman Middle School?in?Palo Alto, California?is named after himself and his son. Lewis Terman was the father of?Frederick Terman, who, as?provost of?Stanford University, greatly expanded the science, statistics and engineering departments that helped catapult Stanford into the ranks of the world?s first class educational institutions, as well as spurring the growth of?Silicon Valley. |
Isn?t that ?sweet?? IQ testing followed by, if necessary compulsory sterilization ? after all, they are prolific breeders!
| A NNDB.com profile of Lewis Terman: Like many leading scientists of his time, Terman was a strong supporter of eugenics programs, and enthusiastically argued that his test results proved that ?the intelligence of the average negro is vastly inferior to that of the average white man. ? The intelligence of the American Indian has also been over-rated, for mental tests indicate that it is not greatly superior to that of the average negro. Our Mexican population, which is largely of Indian extraction, makes little if any better showing.? He declared that his own IQ had been measured at 180. Terman believed that children who scored high on his IQ tests were likely to become society?s leaders in adulthood. Toward this end, he conducted detailed and extended studies of more than 1,000 children deemed ?gifted? under his tests, but the results of his studies are considered marred by Terman?s frequent offering of guidance and assistance to these children. He published studies purporting to have measured the IQs of dead scientists including?Carl Friedrich Gauss,?Isaac Newton, and?Gottfried Leibniz, by complex calculations that considered such factors as the length of their encyclopedia biographies. He also?developed systems to measure masculinity, femininity, and marital happiness. |
Wow, that ?systems to measure masculinity, femininity and marital happiness? is starting to sound like the healthy marriage responsible fatherhood movement of ?Welfare Reform? (1996ff), which, also, FYI brought up prior to passage the problem with prolific breeding of certain ethnicities, which were of course going to swamp the caseloads and, as single mothers, are a burden to society. (Some things never change)?.
Let?s bring this up a littler more to current:
What, pray tell, does all this have to do with the ?Our Broken Family Courts? conference in Arizona, which was then followed up by the ?Our Broken Family Courts Initiative? which we are supposed to believe indicates that Nicholas Cummings and his Foundatin, (primarily purposes ? increasing the use and practice of psychology as a profession and, with his colleagues, also at times pushing for prescriptive (Rx) privileges for psychologists (why should psychiatrists have all the fun?), and mental health treatment as available through the primary healthcare system, and recommended throughout our lifetimes?
I don?t know, but again here?s from that post last April
| And, John Caccavale, with his association with Nicholas Cummings, which we need to talk about ? the Cummings Family and their Foundations specifically as it promotes the mainstreamining of the profession of behavioral health: John Caccavale, Ph.D. Presently, How many times can you squeeze the words ?behavioral health? into a bio?: John Caccavale, Ph.D.,ABMP Dr. Caccavale is a California?licensed clinical and neuropsychologist?and the executive director of NAPPP. He is a diplomate of the American Board of Medical Psychology. Dr. Caccavale is a long time advocate for the advancement of?clinical and medical psychology?and its inclusion into?primary behavioral healthcare. Dr. Caccavale serves on a number of professional boards including the American Board of Medical Psychology, the?National Institute of Behavioral Health Quality?and the?American Board of Behavioral health Practice. He is the Chair of the?Behavioral Health Committee?of Orange County Medical Reserve Corp.? He has published numerous articles and book reviews on a wide array of subjects but, in recent years, has confined his writings to the current issues facing the profession.? Dr. Caccavale is a strong advocate for?doctoral level psychology practice?and, although he is?a trained psychopharmacologist, [i.e. he can Rx a situation] he advocates for?psychotherapy as a first line treatment?for?behavioral disorders. Nicholas Cummings, Ph.D, Sc.D. Dr. Cummings is a psychologist who has been predicting the course of psychology for the past 50 years, and has innovated steps to enhance the profession along the way. He has authored 47 books. In the 1950s he wrote the first comprehensive prepaid psychotherapy insurance benefit and through his medical cost offset research convinced third party payors to include psychotherapy as a covered benefit. His pioneering ?intermittent, focused psychotherapy throughout the life cycle? is the way most psychologists practice today. He was active with the Dirty Dozen for 30 years, founded the professional school movement through the four campuses of the California School of Professional Psychology, created the nation?s only psychology-driven national healthcare company which grew to 25 million covered lives and in which psychiatric/medical directors reported to psychologists, and a host of other innovations too numerous to mention. He served as President of the APA, has six honorary doctorates, and holds every honor the profession can bestow, including the Gold Medal. In predicting the necessity of professional psychology to become integrated into mainstream healthcare for its survival, in 2008 he founded the Doctor of Behavioral Health program at Arizona State University. For 44 years in spite of everything else he was doing, he maintained a psychotherapy practice of no less than 40 to 50 patients per week. At the present time he is President of the Cummings Foundation for Behavioral Health,** Distinguished Professor at the University of Nevada, Reno. |
**well, whose foundation is it? Only natural he might be President!
The following section (again, from the post) reveals his attitude to whether single mothers should have the option to become single mothers without the responsible input of ? well, the professionals who know better, I guess, obviously?
He also brings up in his concerns of ?vital social significance? (and this next is the first concern):
|
I am bringing this up now to contrast with the recent collaboration of the CRISIS IN THE COURTS groups (who are promoting the same rhetoric year after year, rather than talking about the nonprofits running the courts, i.e., this is basically the same material year after year, which has been promoted loudly since the formation of Center for Judicial Excellence nonprofit, in order to promote a 42-minute film talking about, the Crisis in the Courts. Since then, whether it?s Dr. Phil, California Safe Child Coalition, Battered Mothers? Custody Conferenc e? or if possible, getting the attention of someone at the White House ? this message has
Melky Cabrera Mayim Bialik Rich Kids of Instagram felix hernandez julia child Ron Palillo katy perry
No comments:
Post a Comment